I'm not quite sure what you're saying Karen. Both the Christian bible and the Islamic Koran have violent parts. I agree. In both the Middle East and the West there have been political, economic, and communication changes. I agree. Now I will say the changes have been greater in the Middle East with a resulting greater clash of world views. We are not only involved in a religious war we are involved in a clash of a first wave agrarian/nomadic/second wave industrial society with a third wave informational society. The Islamic fundamentalist are not fighting against Christianity, they are fighting against the influx of the Western idea of mortal secular government law as opposed to divine law, the same battle being fought by Christian fundamentalists. Both groups pick parts of their divine holy scripts to support their ends. So I don't see any difference between Christianity and Islam in that regard. Both sets of holy books contain good and bad and both religions have adherents that choose to value the good and down play the bad, and groups that tend to dwell on the more violent passages. I don't believe all Muslims have to be violent anymore than I believe all Christians or Jews have to be violent. So I disagree with Samantha's statement as I understand it to mean that Christianity has to be peaceful and Islam has to be violent. Maybe I don't fully understand what's being said here.
I'm saying that they're not similar at all when it comes to violence. The Bible never says anywhere that nonchristians should be killed by followers of Jesus. That's the bottom line. The US government doesn't give a fuck about the militia movement. It's just a minor annoyance to them. Even our old, pudgy National Guard people could take out the militia dummies. The US Army wouldn't be needed.
Ok so let's just pretend guns used as self defense and deterrence never happen, and discredit them with stories of reckless idiocy. Nicely done.
^ Sorry 6, but you are the one twisting things here, not Balbus. What you project on him there seems not right: that he pretends that guns used for self defense never happen. It seems he said guns are still far more often used to intimidate and threaten than for self defense or the protection of others, and when it is used for the latter its often done in an illegal/unpreferable way (correct me Balbus if needed, its not my intent to put words in your mouth). Not nicely done
*sigh* first when you made the remark about "all of Islam does not condemn" it is incorrect. Islam is the religion, Muslims are the practitioners of that religion. the practitioners will cover the spectrum of tolerance, but Islam, the religion/teachings, DOES NOT tolerate homosexual or many other things whatsoever. Perfect example of why I always say you need to differentiate the practitioners from what the base their beliefs on. The two rarely ever coincide. I fail to understand why that concept is hard to grasp for some people. Karen gets; pretty much exactly what I was saying in my prior post. When you get right down to it, modern Islam promotes violence, modern Christianity promotes peace. It really is that simple and friggin' obvious. so MeAgain, if you still have a problem comprehending this idea, maybe you should actually try taking a peek at the source materials. as Karen points out, the bits of the "second revelation" in Islam that promote violence have been there all along. No recent evolution into a religion of intolerance and violence, Islam has always been that.
Come on, you aren't that clueless. Have you not been following the conversation regarding this? Does the info Karen quoted about the two "books" and which takes precedence clarify things a bit?
I understand your point. I'm not a scholar of the Bible or the Islamic holy books so I search the net.... So make of that what you will, I'm not trying to convince you. Now as to Christianity, if we disregard the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 13 and 17), which we really can't do, we still find the words of Luke 19:27. Now, I said I was no Bible scholar so someone we have to explain Luke 19:27 to me. And as Jesus is God as part of the Holy Trinity; God is three persons, each person is divine, and there is only one God; as as God (one of the forms of the divinity which includes Jesus) speaks in the Old Testament we really can't throw Deuteronomy 13 and 17 out the window. Again this is just my understanding, I'm ready to be corrected in a convincing manner.
Aha, so you ARE that clueless. You don't understand because you have adopted the Balbus method of discussion, twist a persons remarks around so they appear to convey something the person never originally intended. what is being said is bottom line, Islam's text promotes violence, Christianities does not. In this instance you need to forget about the practitioners and consider the "holy texts" upon which these religions are based. Is it really that difficult? Then after considering what the holy text instructs believers to do, you then have to ask yourself "how strong are the religious convictions of those "peaceful" Muslims if they are pressed to make a choice?" Disagreeing with fact's because of your own personal opinions is the height of enlightened thinking...:rolling my eyes and doing the facepalm:
Working on replies Nox...bear with me... I'll buy your point about Islam and Muslims. Islam is the religion, Muslims the follower of that religion. I'll also concede that the Koran has passages about evils of homosexuality, no problem there. What I don't grasp is why similar passages in the Bible are ignored? Christians just brush of the Old Testament as if it doesn't belong in their Bible. And I did find one passage from Jesus which seems to me to imply violence against non believers. So I'm looking at the source material... I see passages promoting violence in the Bible and the Koran....what don't I get???? I see Muslim nations that don't promote violence, what don't I get? Aren't they real Muslims?
Seriously???? The passages you refer to are a parable and not an actual command or admonishment from Jesus. The parable refers to the "final judgement". Do you really need further explanation?
So you want to discuss the bottom line? What does that mean, an opinion? There are passages in the Bible and Koran that promote violence...do you disagree? You have read the Bible from cover to cover...did you see any passages that promote violence?
This line is from a parable, not instructions to followers. It should not be quoted out of context. Laws for the ancient nation of Israel. Followers of Paul are not Jews. They do not live by Jewish (OT) law. I think it's interesting to note that Peter had mixed feelings about this approach. Maybe it would be less confusing if modern Christians were called Paulians.
I wish i was on my computer.. I might have added my 2 cents. But at the same time it seems to go off topic. I still wish this in depth religion stuff would be discussed in another thread and not in this one.
passages in the OT concerning the Law and crap CAN be ignored by people following Christianity because THAT is the basis of the religion. Freed by grace, no longer condemned by the law, yada, yada, yada..... Once again, both Christianity and Islam hold that the most recent revelation takes precedence over previous revelations, SO when we look at what these "revelations" teach, we find Islam promotes violence and Christianity does not. You keep getting stuck on the same bump when there is no need if you set aside your preconceptions.
Yes I do, I'm not afraid to admit I'm wrong. What do you mean by a parable? Is a parable meant to teach something or to misdirect? Sounds pretty clear to me. You're saying he really didn't mean what he said?
If we look at reality we find that both these religions promote violence sometimes and peace at other.
Well. We'll let it go...... I was taught that the Old Testament was part of the Christian religion, in fact Christ was the Messiah promised in the Old Testament, but I guess that's what happens being brought up Roman Catholic. And I took the words of Jesus at their face value. Guess I was wrong.
